BBC Blog Network

User Profile

petepassword

Listed below are comments made by petepassword between Wednesday, 18th February 2009 and Friday, 13th March 2009.

«Newer
Older»

PM goes to war with Newsnight. 11:39am on 13 Mar 2009 I remember when PM used to be about current affairs, rather than current jokes.
PM goes to war with Newsnight. 11:37am on 13 Mar 2009 48. At 4:01pm on 12 Mar 2009, Eddie Mair wrote:

Mmm. Which contributor to this very thread emailed pm recently re the newsletter saying "please unsubscribe me from this and also from the blog, I shan't be taking part in the charade any more".

Must have changed his mind!

No, a final attempt to see if there was any change to the intelligence of the posts, no change there.

Actually Eddie, you know what others here won't know, that a post of mine which criticised you for repeating a racist slur [from the English umpire] on a Pakistani police officer who shielded him with his own body, with comment on his 'broken English' to the Pakistani spokesman you interviewed, as if this was a valid criticism to repeat, was removed by the auntie mods.

So, sorry to disturb the generally silly season dynamics of this place, but I promise I won't do it again.

Charlie, it doesn't need a crystal ball, just a brain and the ability to take in information and draw conclusions. But carry on, it's all a giggle anyway. Wonder if the giggling will still be happening in a year's time, ten year's time? Anyone think about the future we're storing up for ourselves? Anyone care?
PM goes to war with Newsnight. 2:11pm on 12 Mar 2009 Not just the jokes fit for a ten year old, the comments here all seem to be as well. Oh, it's called light-hearted! And this while the country and world sinks into a ten year recession as the planet plunges into an environmental melt down. I suppose it's called escapism.

PM joins Big Brother as distractions for the simple minded. This board removes the will to live.
The Glass Box for Wednesday. 6:19pm on 04 Mar 2009 19. Joseph Walker

Here here. Seems to me that globalisation profits the rich, while putting millions of workers out of work with their jobs taken by the poorest and therefore most desperate workers elsewhere. It's also inefficient in terms of energy and the environment.

What's really insane is the importing of the same products that are also exported, while paying lip service to shopping locally. British Vension is mostly exported, while the country imports New Zealand farmed venison because the 'product' is uniform which is what the supermarkets like.

There are plenty of other examples everywhere.

If protectionism safeguards British jobs in a time of deepening recession, how can that possibly be bad? The taxpayer already has a giant debt to pay off from handing the gamblers, sorry bankers, enought to sort them out and guarantee pensions, now they are supposed to support a growing army of unemployed while jobs are either taken up by imported low-paid labour or exported abroad.

If buying food grown only a few miles away rather than flown in from South America is the right thing to do, it must also apply to other products and services.

This country was once self sufficient, which didn't make any fortunes for global gamblers and other bread heads, but was efficient, healthy and debt free for the citizens.

Let's have that debate about protectionism, how is it such a good thing? Anyone know, Eddie?
Texting whilst driving. 12:08pm on 20 Feb 2009 18. funnyJoedunn

Agree about mobiles, I use a mobile for the same reason I once searched for a phone box, to make an urgent call when needed. I hate being at other's beck and call, so rarely have it switched on and even forget to take it with me on occasions. It's kids who are worst, they appear not to be able to function without it glued to their ears - brain tumours in the future? I wonder how they would all function if the networks all went down and mobiles were useless bits of plastic.

But widening the debate to computers is too far. We don't carry them around, they don't interfere with other's concentration. Whether they make life easier is a big question; my job of typesetting/graphic design used to be done with lead type and large wooden trays to hold them, and with huge drawing boards, pencils, brushes, scalpels, glue and a lot more.

Now it's all done on computer with 'software tools', easier in many ways, but the time saved is then used up reading interminable instructions in techie speak, constant searching for answers and essential elements and a lot more time wasting. Net result probably equal.
The Glass Box for Thursday. 5:48pm on 19 Feb 2009 Bet the Countryside Alliance pays good salaries.

What a spurious argument delivered in a practised silky voice, could be a solicitor. Interesting he compares dogs with wolves, which of course they are, but neglects to mention that wolves don't and never did hunt foxes, another predator/scavenger, and akin to eating cousins. The fox isn't eaten by the hominids who hunt it, it is uneatable except to flies. And as with all predator/scavengers, the fox regulates its population according to food supply, it could be no other way, so there is no need to hunt them, and more than there is a need for Americans to shoot wolves.

What a hypocrite. One can only assume he joined the League Against Cruel Sports as a career move and nothing more. No one who genuinely cared about animal welfare would accept that hunting a wild animal to exhaustion before ripping it apart for pleasure is 'the best way', as he charmingly put it. Best way for what? Not for controlling foxes. Those who hunt foxes or any other animal for pleasure are perverts. This man has joined them.
The Glass Box for Wednesday. 10:42am on 19 Feb 2009 9. At 5:21pm on 18 Feb 2009, Sid wrote:

'PP (8) - I bet it is - or is there some mechanism which stops it cooling? Do you think it's heating up, or staying the same??'

You have actually put a bet on with a bookie have you, or was that rhetorical?

Yes, there is a mechanism that stops cooling, we call it the sun and it's been doing it since planet Earth first appeared from the cosmic debris.

It's not me thinking it's heating up, it millions of people knowing it is, and tens of thousands of them highly trained and experienced scientists. You people who deny it are ostriches; it's inconvenient, it means you have to change your selfish, consuming and polluting lifestyles, it means admitting the hippies and then the greens were right all along. I know how difficult this all is, but you just have to make the effort, especially if you have any children or plan to.

If you're coming from the 'humans couldn't possibly affect something as huge as the Earth, think locusts; when their population explodes they can devastate thousands of square killometres, and they are just eating. Humans are still slashing and burning the remaining bits of forest, we are covering vast areas in concrete and tarmac annually, we are filling the air with carbon from our cars, boats, planes and power stations. I think you'll find we can affect the atmosphere and climate.
The Glass Box for Wednesday. 10:28am on 19 Feb 2009 49. oldgifford

Unless you're really really old you may well see the evidence of your own eyes; whether you interpret it correctly is another matter. Climate change isn't long term [1000 years???] it's happening NOW. See the poles melting? See the floods happening in many countries that never saw floods before? See Australia burning? See the glaciers moving and melting faster?

Facts speak for themselves: the planet was covered with immense forests for millions of years. They removed vast quantities of carbon from the atmosphere over millions of years. Then animals evolved and eventually humans, and we released most of the stored carbon in 200 years. That much is not disputed except by the criminally insane.

Now there is just the question of whether carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas [along with methane]. If you dispute that, you need to say why and how, as there is plenty of scientific evidence to say it is.

If you are as old as you say you are, you should remember when the climate was far more predictable; we had summers, we had winters, and in between we had spring and autumn. Anyone who has experience of the natural [real] world knows that the seasons are shot to pieces, we can have summer days in the middle of winter, people remark in January that it's like spring, summers can seem more like autumn or even winter. The animals are certainly confused, as are plants which are putting on growth at inappropriate times. Birds hatch young when there is no food available, many species are finding it difficult to adapt, and some of our native plant species are moving north and may be extinct in not many years.

The evidence is all around, indisputable, there for all to see. You're like a passenger on the Titanic, 'what iceberg, I see no iceberg, I'm having too good a time to worry about icebergs.'
The Glass Box for Wednesday. 10:48pm on 18 Feb 2009 17. At 5:56pm on 18 Feb 2009, oldgifford wrote:

The Earth has been cooling since 1998, if you don't believe me perhaps you'll believe the Met office. From their website today.
"Prof. Phil Jones, Director of the Climatic Research Unit, University of East Anglia, saying: "The fact that 2008 is forecast to be cooler than any of the last seven years (and that 2007 did not break the record warmth set on 1998) does not mean that global warming has gone away"

You are confusing The Earth, a planetary body, with '2008 is forecast to be cooler' this is talking about weather, an entirely different thing. The Earth has not stopped cooling, it's getting stored in the oceans, hence more violent storms, more heavy rain, floods etc. These are a part of weather, but weather can also include cold spells, cold snaps, heat waves and all manner of variance. This is weather, not The Earth. The Earth has not cooled, nor will it. I don't know what peers reviewed your claims... and I hope it's not another 'it's the sun wot dunnit'. You are a diminishing band, if you can't believe the decades of work by many thousands of highly qualified climate scientists, perhaps you'll believe the evidence of your own eyes one day.
The Glass Box for Wednesday. 5:30pm on 18 Feb 2009 I fail to see why we have to bend over backwards to ensure the human rights of someone who is known to be at the very least a radicaliser of young British born Muslims and complicit in acts of terrorism which have denied totally the rights of British people by killing them.

This wooly liberal, PC multicultural embracing soft attitude, which gave the world Londonistan, a haven for wanted extremists from around the world, is used and abused by our enemies. When will those who seem concerned about Abu Quatada being ill treated in Jordan, realise they are helping in the destruction of the very liberalism they hold dear.

While the British suffer ever more encroachments of our liberty; CCTV, ID cards, email and telephone surveillance, people like Abu Quatada are protected as if they are somehow precious and don't plot to cause ever more carnage and rejoice at any outrage committed against us.

Why should be be bothered if he is tortured in Jordan? Horrible things happen all the time, often to totally innocent people, he is not our responsibility, he's not British, we have no debt to him, in fact, he's been poncing off the British taxpayer for far too long and should have been deported years ago.

Hook can join him whenever he finishes his sentence.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

petepassword